Skip to main content
discipline 3 October 2026
‹ Browse decisions

Decision record

Levent Halil Chetinkaya & Tracey Curaba

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
BodySolicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT)
Professionsolicitor
Case number11818/2018
Date01/01/2018
OutcomeS.43 Order (clerks), Strike off

Allegation / charges

Breaches

Findings — machine-extracted (anthropic-batch:claude-opus-4-8); verify against the decision

SanctionStrike Off
CostsGBP 9,000
Dishonesty foundYes

The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found that solicitor Levent Chetinkaya, after his client's signed conveyancing documents were lost, instructed his legal secretary Tracey Curaba to create and backdate a letter dated 6 April 2017 to give a false impression that documents had been sent out (allegation 1.1), and deliberately misled his client as to the whereabouts of her documents to conceal their loss (allegation 1.3). Both allegations were found proved with dishonesty (applying the Ivey test), breaching Principles 2, 4, 5 and 6. Allegations 1.2 and 1.4 (and the associated dishonesty) were not proved. The Tribunal found no exceptional circumstances and struck him off the Roll, ordering him to pay £9,000 costs. The Second Respondent (unadmitted) was found to have created and backdated the letter on his instructions, knowing it was wrong, with dishonesty proved (allegation 2.1); allegation 2.2 was not proved. She was made subject to a section 43 order and ordered to pay £1,000 costs. Total costs were assessed at £11,250, reduced and apportioned due to the Applicant's procedural failings (an inaccurate Rule 5 Statement paragraph and late disclosure of a relevant email).

Duties found breached:

Aggravating factors:

  • Dishonesty found proved
  • Deliberate and calculated misconduct continued over a period
  • Two separate incidences of dishonesty
  • Concealment was the whole intention
  • Self-serving motivation to insulate himself against complaint
  • Involved a subordinate (the Second Respondent) in his misconduct
  • Lack of insight; attempted to rewrite history in evidence; no early admissions

Mitigating factors:

  • No previous appearance before the Tribunal
  • Otherwise unblemished career save for an earlier Regulatory Settlement Agreement
  • Harm to client somewhat limited
  • Testimonials as to good character
  • Personal difficulties (marriage breakdown, sole carer for children), heavy workload and fasting during Ramadan (found not to be exceptional circumstances)

Duties engaged

Documents

Source: https://solicitorstribunal.org.uk/case/11818/